On Mon, 1 Nov 2010, Dean Anderson wrote:
> Tunneling to another ISP isn't going to be very efficient. You are down > if they are down, or if anything in between you and them is down; then > you have ordinary problems if anything in between them and the client is > down. (that was severe enough to motivate the search for multihoming) For mission-critical applications you are correct, but other than that, current reliability seems sufficient. Of course, this may vary with the broadband provider, and the specific physical location of the broadband endpoint. > BGP flapping can make things worse on both connections. BGP can be configured so this is minimized. > Why not just get a /24 from VZ and dual home your DNS, mail, etc servers > to different IP addresses? Seems easier. I don't know how much Verizon would charge for this, even if it were available. Secondary DNS & SMTP servers are something I would assume is already in use. So, this IP over IP isn't the solution for every problem, but it does have applications. For instance, someone running a mini- WISP off of their cable modem and some wifi APs. They'd want to hide the fact they're using comcast or whatever as their upstream, and provide routable IPs to their users. Wifi isn't suitable for mission-critical applications in the first place, so the addition of the VPN doesn't degrade the reliability value much. It does add latency, however, so perhaps VoIP wouldn't work so well. The use of the VPN/cable modem as a backup in case the primary network connection fails does make sense. More latency is certainly better than no service. -Bob _______________________________________________ bblisa mailing list [email protected] http://www.bblisa.org/mailman/listinfo/bblisa
